North Carolina v. Rice

(Redirected from 404 U.S. 244)
North Carolina v. Rice
Syllabus
943449North Carolina v. Rice — Syllabus

United States Supreme Court

404 U.S. 244

North Carolina  v.  Rice

Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

No. 70-77  Argued: October 12, 1971 --- Decided: December 14, 1971

Respondent was convicted in a General County Court in North Carolina of driving while intoxicated and was sentenced to nine months' imprisonment and payment of a fine. On appeal, he was tried de novo in the Superior Court, found guilty, and given a two-year sentence. The District Court denied habeas corpus, and respondent, who by then had been completely discharged from prison, appealed to the Court of Appeals. That court, relying on North Carolina v. Pearce, 395 U.S. 711, held the the case was not mooted by respondent's discharge, and that respondent was entitled to have the record of his conviction expunged.

Held: North Carolina v. Pearce, supra, does not require that respondent's conviction be invalidated but only that he be resentenced if the higher sentence imposed after the de novo trial was vulnerable under Pearce. Since the present record deals with the mootness issue only from the standpoint of conviction vel non and does not reveal whether, under state law, benefits accrue to respondent in having his sentence reduced after he has served it, the case is remanded for reconsideration of the mootness question.

434 F. 2d 797, vacated and remanded.


Jacob L. Safron, Assistant Attorney General of North Carolina, argued the cause for petitioner. With him on the brief was Robert Morgan, Attorney General. Joining in and adopting the brief were the Attorneys General for their respective States as follows: Gary K. Nelson of Arizona, Ray Thornton of Arkansas, Robert L. Shevin of Florida, Theodore L. Sendak of Indiana, Vern Miller of Kansas, John B. Breckinridge of Kentucky, James S. Erwin of Maine, Francis B. Burch of Maryland, A.F. Summer of Mississippi, Robert L. Woodahl of Montana, Clarence A.H. Meyer of Nebraska, Helgi Johanneson of North Dakota, Crawford C. Martin of Texas, Vernon B. Romney of Utah, and Andrew P. Miller of Virginia.

William W. Van Alstyne argued the cause and filed a brief for respondent.

Briefs of amici curiae urging reversal were filed by John W. Benoit, Jr., Deputy Attorney General, for the State of Maine, and by Vernon B. Romney, Attorney General of Utah, pro se.

The Prison Research Counsel filed a brief as amicus curiae urging affirmance.

Notes edit

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).

Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse